Anker/Eufy security camera scandal

@Usernames I didn’t know about the Eufy thing (hadn’t happened yet when I got mine) but reading through that article it just seems like they messed up security, point being it wasn’t malicious, so I see no reason to stop buying their cables because of that.

Also, I found this follow up in which they admit to their mistakes.


While you may not attribute malice to their actions (perhaps just incompetence) I think knowingly misleading customers like they did with the prominent local only marketing (the main attraction of the product and likely the main reason somebody would choose to buy the product) then not acknowledging or explaining their “errors” or even apologising instead deleting the privacy promises from their materials is not a company I want to see or help grow.

This is a personal choice each of us need to make but I believe we need to hold companies/people accountable.

I’m happy if people are aware of Eufy’s history and the link between Eufy and Anker and can make up their own minds on what they want to support. Just like I cannot force people to support right to repair I’m still conscious of what I encourage or discourage with how I spend my money, I feel like it’s one of the only ways we have a tangible impact on the world around us.

Original video from security researcher Paul Moore

Here is a video from LTT explaining why they are dropping Anker as a sponsor, Linus is know for being very anti misleading marketing so it is no surprise to me they dropped Anker.

A follow up


@Usernames To be fair, they did more than apologizing: they fixed the security issues.

I’d chose to buy from company who, like Eufy, has undergone scrutiny and has fixed exposed problems, over a company who never had problems revealed only because they were never scrutinized.

Would you buy a GENBOLT, a BOIFUN, a SOOHAO or a YENNOV camera? Me neither. Even though they were never hit by any scandal…


My understanding is that at this point Anker is going to be scrutinizing their own product more, a third party firm is going to scrutinize their stuff internally, and another third party is going scrutinize their stuff in public. Far better than the empty assurances from other manufacturers that they are secure…i.e. have not been exposed yet. Essentially Anker is now handling it correctly.


My two cents:

I havent heard of this security incident until recently.

  • I don’t buy security cameras and would never do so, especially not some that have cloud/internet access
  • I don’t trust any company to ever get security right. So far, I have never been disappointed by this approach.

The denying was a bad move, yes, but I am not sure who was ultimatively responsible for that action, as there were probably lawyers involved as well.

Ultimatively, I bought Anker products in my past (a lot actually) and I’m satisfied with each and every one of them.

Lastly I am not sure how the discussion could derail so much, the original topic was completely different.


As I understood it they issued an apology for poor communication not directly apologising for their misleading statements or marketing claims (which they deleted instead of fixing the product to match) or mistakes they made.

That they could market a product highly focused on local only security and privacy while not being either including uploading facial recognition data to their AWS server already speaks poorly of the company to me but more so was the way they handled the situation, it was not encouraging at all.

I know what you are saying but I would never buy any IOT cameras or IOT devices in general.

1 Like

They have admitted to the issue as well as announced having fixed it (yes, they eventually really fixed the product), so that counts as directly admitting their mistake.

(And I regard “admitting a mistake” the same as “apologizing for a mistake”.)

1 Like

I’m glad they fixed their mistakes (for all users of the product) that is good but not surprising (unless they want to kill the company) but my point was also the handling was poor plus nature of the missteps do not inspire confidence.

I don’t necessarily agree with your view that admitting to a mistake is the same as apologising for it though I can certainly see you point of view.

As a reminder of the first paragraph of the linked Verge article:

First, Anker told us it was impossible. Then, it covered its tracks. It repeatedly deflected while utterly ignoring our emails. So shortly before Christmas, we gave the company an ultimatum: if Anker wouldn’t answer why its supposedly always-encrypted Eufy cameras were producing unencrypted streams — among other questions — we would publish a story about the company’s lack of answers.

It worked.